Identifying Future-Proof Science Peter

Vickers
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebookmass.com/product/identifying-future-proof-science-peter-vickers/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

Rogue Waves: Future-Proof Your Business to Survive and

Profit from Radical Change Jonathan Brill

https://ebookmass.com/product/rogue-waves-future-proof-your-
business-to-survive-and-profit-from-radical-change-jonathan-
brill/

The Future of East Asia 1st Edition Peter Hayes

https://ebookmass.com/product/the-future-of-east-asia-1st-
edition-peter-hayes/

Speculation: Within and about Science Peter Achinstein

https://ebookmass.com/product/speculation-within-and-about-
science-peter-achinstein/

R Programming for Actuarial Science Peter Mcquire

https://ebookmass.com/product/r-programming-for-actuarial-
science-peter-mcquire/
Final Proof Rodrigues Ottolengui

https://ebookmass.com/product/final-proof-rodrigues-ottolengui-2/

Final Proof Rodrigues Ottolengui

https://ebookmass.com/product/final-proof-rodrigues-ottolengui/

Challenges in Science Education: Global Perspectives

for the Future Gregory P. Thomas

https://ebookmass.com/product/challenges-in-science-education-
global-perspectives-for-the-future-gregory-p-thomas/

Polymer science and innovative applications materials,

techniques, and future developments Deepalekshmi
Ponnamma

https://ebookmass.com/product/polymer-science-and-innovative-
applications-materials-techniques-and-future-developments-
deepalekshmi-ponnamma/

The Evolution of Music Through Culture and Science

Peter Townsend

https://ebookmass.com/product/the-evolution-of-music-through-
culture-and-science-peter-townsend/
 OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 1/7/2022, SPi

Identifying Future-Proof Science

OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 1/7/2022, SPi
 OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 1/7/2022, SPi

Identifying Future-Proof
Science
PETER VICKERS
OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 1/7/2022, SPi

Great Clarendon Street, Oxford, OX2 6DP,

United Kingdom
Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford.
It furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship,
and education by publishing worldwide. Oxford is a registered trade mark of
Oxford University Press in the UK and in certain other countries
© Peter Vickers 2023
The moral rights of the author have been asserted
First Edition published in 2023
Impression: 1
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in
a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the
prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted
by law, by licence or under terms agreed with the appropriate reprographics
rights organization. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the
above should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University Press, at the
address above
You must not circulate this work in any other form
and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer
Published in the United States of America by Oxford University Press
198 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016, United States of America
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data
Data available
Library of Congress Control Number: 2022935028
ISBN 978–0–19–286273–0
DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780192862730.001.0001
Printed and bound by
CPI Group (UK) Ltd, Croydon, CR0 4YY
Links to third party websites are provided by Oxford in good faith and
for information only. Oxford disclaims any responsibility for the materials
contained in any third party website referenced in this work.
 OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 1/7/2022, SPi

For my parents
OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 1/7/2022, SPi
 OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 1/7/2022, SPi

Contents

Preface ix
List of Figures xiii
1. What Is Future-Proof Science? 1
1 Science and Scepticism 1
2 Misleading Evidence 6
3 Approximate Truth 10
4 Future-Proof Science 13
5 Outline of the Book 19
2. The Historical Challenge to Future-Proof Science:
The Debate So Far 23
1 Frustration and Miscommunication in the ‘Scientific
Realism Debate’ 23
2 Stanford’s Scientific Scepticism: Death by a Thousand
Qualifications? 29
3 The Historical Challenge: Are We Epistemically Privileged? 38
4 Weight of Evidence Judgements: Scientists vs Philosophers 43
3. Meckel’s Successful Prediction of Gill Slits: A Case of Misleading
Evidence? 52
1 Introduction 52
2 The Gill Slit Prediction: Success from Falsity? 54
3 A Response? 60
4 Von Baer 63
5 The Argument from Empirical Knowledge 67
6 Conclusion 72
4. The Tiktaalik ‘Missing Link’ Novel Predictive Success
and the Evidence for Evolution 76
1 Introduction 76
2 Tiktaalik: An Impressive Novel Predictive Success
of Evolution Theory? 78
3 The Full Body of Evidence 87
4 The ‘Consensus Approach’ to Evolution 91
5 Conclusion 98
5. The Judgement of the Scientific Community: Lessons from
Continental Drift 100
1 Introduction 100
2 Was There a Consensus Regarding the Truth of Continental
Permanency? 102
OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 1/7/2022, SPi

viii 

3 Tackling the Threshold Problem (i): Analysing Community

Dynamics 111
4 Tackling the Threshold Problem (ii): Trust Based on
Past Reliability 120
5 Conclusion 127
6. Fundamental Physics and the Special Vulnerability to
Underdetermination 130
1 Introduction 130
2 The Sommerfeld Miracle 133
3 In Search of a Principled Epistemic Distinction 141
4 Rejecting Calls for a Principled Epistemic Distinction 150
5 Interpreting Claims from Fundamental Physics 155
6 Conclusion 162
7. Do We Know How the Dinosaurs Died? 164
1 Introduction 164
2 Assessing the Opposition—First Pass 168
3 Assessing the Opposition—Second Pass 171
4 Should We Believe the Alvarez Hypothesis? 179
5 Coda on Approximate Truth 186
6 Concluding Thoughts 188
8. Scientific Knowledge in a Pandemic 190
1 Misuse and Abuse of ‘Scientific Consensus’ 190
2 When Was the Cause of Covid-19 Known with Certainty? 192
2.1 Kinds and Outliers 193
2.2 The Empirical Route to Future-Proof Science 196
3 The Mesosome Objection 203
4 Concluding Thoughts 213
9. Core Argument, Objections, Replies, and Outlook 216
1 Can We Identify Future-Proof Science? 216
1.1 The Criteria for Future-Proof Science 216
1.2 The Core Argument Behind the Criteria 219
1.3 Identifying Future-Proof Science in Practice 221
2 Objections and Replies 223
2.1 ‘Truth is not decided by a show of hands’ 223
2.2 When Is a Scientific Community Sufficiently Diverse for
Future-Proof Science? 227
2.3 Counterexamples 229
2.4 Is the Sun a Star? 232
3 Implications for School Education 234
4 Outlook 237

Bibliography 241
Index 261
 OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 1/7/2022, SPi

Preface

This book starts with something that looks more like philosophy of science,
and ends with something that looks more like sociology of science. Or perhaps
I should say integrated history, philosophy, and sociology of science. One
reason is that the methods of ‘pure’ philosophy can be frustrating: they never
seem to establish anything definitively. Debates seem destined to go around in
circles, or else evolve somehow, without ever reaching a firm conclusion that
might be held up to outsiders as a noteworthy achievement. I tried to add
something important to the ‘scientific realism debate’ earlier in my career, fully
imbued with the philosophy that the truth is out there, and the thought that
just maybe I could help us reach that truth. But the tools at my disposal as a
‘pure’ philosopher never seemed to go very far. Whilst one could fill a career
that way, I didn’t want to just fill a career; I wanted to reach truth, or at least
head clearly in that direction.
Thus I was drawn towards methods that were not merely philosophical.
History seemed a good place to start, since with the history of science comes
data, of a kind, that one might build a philosophy upon. Thus we reach ‘HPS’,
a field premised on a thorough integration of history and philosophy of
science. But what came to me much later was the thought that the methods
of sociology might also be thrown into the mix. I had been averse to sociology,
since the term ‘sociology of science’ always seemed to be attached to a specific
(rather extreme) attitude towards science, as being so thoroughly influenced
by social factors that there could never be any talk of ‘facts’, as I understood
that word. But if we shake this specific movement off, and think more broadly
about what sociology of science might be (social epistemology)—inspired by
scholars such as Helen Longino—then another promising methodology pre-
sents itself. Just as HPS allows for a method that is partially empirical, so too
sociology is no stranger to empirical methods. These methods bring the
endeavour that bit closer to natural science, and move us that bit further
away from ‘pure’ philosophy. In this way, one might still dream of saying
something definitive about science, something that could draw a consensus of
opinion in a way that is vanishingly rare in philosophy.
The extent to which I have managed to combine these methods, and say
something rather definitive, is unclear. It remains predominantly a work in
OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 1/7/2022, SPi

x 

HPS, and the contribution of sociological methods is meagre to say the least.
But I hope that the reader will see value in the attempt, at least. And I hope that
at least some readers will be inclined to pick up the baton and run with it.
There are no doubt many holes in this work, as it stands. But if the funda-
mental methodology constitutes an improvement on ‘the scientific realism
debate’, then it may save some readers years of toil, who would otherwise have
adopted a methodology destined to lead them in circles, or at least nowhere
definitive.
As for the holes, they remain despite my receiving an enormous amount of
help along the way. Indeed, some scholars helped me to write this book to such
an extent that if the culture of co-authorship were more like the natural
sciences, then this monograph might have had twenty co-authors. I would
first mention Kyle Stanford, who read the book carefully from beginning to
end, and offered critical feedback weighty enough to reduce the number of
chapters from ten to nine. Kerry McKenzie also read the whole thing, as did
anonymous Reviewer A, each providing crucial comments (and crucial
encouragement!). Mike Stuart and Hasok Chang both set up reading groups
when I first had a full draft of the book, and each of these meetings brought
immensely valuable feedback. I am hugely grateful to Mike, Hasok, and those
in attendance at these two reading groups.
Some scholars carefully read one or two chapters. Juha Saatsi was a big help
here, challenging me on Chapters 2 and 6, for example. Several scientists
provided invaluable feedback concerning Chapters 5 and 7, including Gillian
Foulger, Peter Schulte, Alessandro Chiarenza, Sean Gulick, Gerta Keller,
Vincent Courtillot, Stephen Brusatte, and Sean McMahon. And concerning
Chapter 7 specifically, I must thank the Geological Society of America (GSA),
who assisted me in acquiring data about past GSA conferences. I benefitted
from similar help courtesy of Jon Korman at the SVP (Society of Vertebrate
Paleontology).
For help and advice on specific issues, sincere thanks (in no particular
order) also go to: Teru Miyake, Naomi Oreskes, Neil Thomason, Thomas
Rossetter, James Fraser, Robin Hendry, Nancy Cartwright, Wendy Parker,
Joseph D. Martin, Timothy D. Lyons, Alexander Bird, Darrell Rowbottom,
Henry Taylor, Douglas Allchin, Andy Hamilton, Ludwig Fahrbach, Maya
Goldenberg, Karim Thebault, Omar El Mawas, Alex Broadbent, and Ian
Kidd. A special vote of thanks to Manuel Galvão de Melo e Mota, who spent
many hours providing me with rich information from the archives of the
SPMicros/SPME (Portuguese Society of Electron Microscopy), far more infor-
mation than I could ultimately use in the book, however fascinating.
 OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 1/7/2022, SPi

 xi

I presented this material, in one form or another, at various venues over the
years, and profited hugely from these experiences, both because I was forced to
reframe the material for presentation, and also because I gained invaluable
feedback from the audiences. Here I must give thanks to 3rd-year undergradu-
ate students at the University of Durham, UK, who took Philosophical Issues
in Contemporary Science between 2015 and 2021, as well as MA students who
took Philosophical Issues in Science and Medicine. Thanks also to the Joseph
Cowen Lifelong Learning Centre, as well as the ‘Lit & Phil’ (both in Newcastle,
UK) where I presented relevant material in 2019. And thanks also to an
audience at Johns Hopkins University, USA, where I presented relevant
material, again in 2019.
Huge thanks of course to the funder, The British Academy, who trusted me
with a Mid-Career Fellowship, which ultimately ran from 1 December 2019
through to 30 June 2021. And thanks to the administrative staff at the
University of Durham research office, including Anna Hutchinson, Linda
Morris, Eleanor Glenton, and Rachael Matthews, who worked hard to make
the Fellowship a reality. This book simply wouldn’t be here without that
Fellowship.
Finally, most important of all was personal support, without which I could
never have completed this project during the extraordinary stresses of the
Covid-19 pandemic. Here I must mention the support of my parents, who
have been solid rocks for me all the way through. I must also mention my
running buddy in Durham, Chris Cowie—those runs were so important for
mental health. But the last word must go to my extraordinary wife, and friend,
Laura Vickers, who has been amazing in a thousand different ways, and who
is, for me, a constant source of inspiration.
OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 1/7/2022, SPi
 OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 1/7/2022, SPi

List of Figures

1.1 A well-known optical illusion. (grebeshkovmaxim, Shutterstock) 9

1.2 Coloured strawberry in human experience of the world; uncoloured
strawberry in the world. (Credits: zizi_mentos, Shutterstock; art of line,
Shutterstock) 9
2.1 The exponential growth of science during the 20th century. 39
Reproduced with permission from Springer; from Mabe and Amin (2001),
‘Growth dynamics of scholarly and scientific journals’, p. 154.
2.2 Revolutions in our thinking about the nature of light, with a linear
x-axis, and including an indication of how one might expect the
pattern to continue. 39
Reproduced with permission from Springer; from Fahrbach (2011), ‘How the
growth of science ends theory change’, p. 142.
2.3 Revolutions in our thinking about the nature of light, now with an
exponential x-axis corresponding to the exponential growth of science 40
Reproduced with permission from Springer; from Fahrbach (2011), ‘How the
growth of science ends theory change’, p. 150.
3.1 The human embryo at five weeks (approx.) compared with other
vertebrate embryos. 59
Nicolas Primola, Shutterstock.
3.2 Comparison of the human heart when the embryo is four weeks old
with the heart of an adult fish. 70
Reproduced from Moody PA (1953), Introduction to Evolution, p. 64
(not under copyright).
3.3 Two routes—top path and bottom path—from a wealth of known
phenomena to a new, predicted phenomenon. 71
4.1 Tiktaalik: half-fish and half-amphibian. 79
(LHS): Eduard Solà, photograph of Tiktaalik in the Field Museum, Chicago
(CC BY-SA 3.0); (RHS): Obsidian Soul - Own work, restoration of Tiktaalik
roseae (CC BY 4.0).
4.2 The evolution of the pectoral appendage, from fish (with fins, LHS) to
amphibians (with limbs, RHS). 80
Reproduced with permission from Springer Nature; from Shubin et al.
(2006), ‘The pectoral fin of Tiktaalik roseae and the origin of the tetrapod limb’,
p. 768; illustration by Kalliopi Monoyios
OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 1/7/2022, SPi

xiv   

4.3 One of many ‘missing link’ cases. 84

Reproduced (slightly adapted) with permission from Springer Nature; from
Friedman (2008), ‘The evolutionary origin of flatfish asymmetry’, Figure 2(c).
5.1 A simple model of the range of attitudes in the scientific community,
and the corresponding rate of uptake of new scientific ideas. 113
Reproduced (adapted) with permission from Simon and Schuster; from
Rogers (2003), Diffusion of Innovations, 5th edition, p. 281.
5.2 The S-shaped curve representing the cumulative uptake of an ‘innovation’. 114
Public domain image, adapted from Rogers (1962), Diffusion of Innovations,
Chapter 7.
5.3 Timeline with key dates to consider vis-à-vis scientific community attitude
towards drift. 121
5.4 Scanning electron microscope image of a single white blood cell
(yellow/right) engulfing anthrax bacteria (orange/left). 125
Image: Volker Brinkmann (November 2005), ‘Neutrophil engulfing Bacillus
anthracis’, PLoS Pathogens 1(3): cover page (CC BY 2.5).
5.5 Three generations of scientists. 126
6.1 Purple, blue, and red lines emitted by hydrogen, and explained by
Bohr’s 1913 theory in terms of certain ‘allowed’ electron jumps between
different values of ‘n’, corresponding to different possible orbits. 135
Reproduced with permission from Richard Pogge (14 September 2021).
6.2 Some of the allowed electron orbits in a hydrogen atom. 136
Reproduced from Bohr’s Nobel lecture ‘The Structure of the Atom’,
delivered 11 December 1922: https://www.nobelprize.org/uploads/2018/06/
bohr-lecture.pdf.
6.3 Diatomic hydrogen. 159
DKN0049, Shutterstock.
7.1 Fossilised fish with their gills clogged with tektites at a site coinciding
with the K-Pg boundary. 167
Reproduced from DePalma et al. (2019), ‘A seismically induced onshore surge
deposit at the KPg boundary, North Dakota’, Figure 6 (Creative Commons
Attribution License 4.0: CC BY).
8.1 Direct images of coronavirus. 198
(a) Reproduced from Reagan et al. (1948), ‘Electron micrograph of the virus of
infectious bronchitis of chickens’—not under copyright; (b) Reproduced with
permission from Oxford University Press; from Domermuth and Edwards (1957),
‘An electron microscope study of chorioallantoic membrane infected with the virus
of avian infectious bronchitis’; (c) Reproduced with permission from Elsevier;
from Berry et al. (1964), ‘The structure of infectious bronchitis virus’.
 OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 1/7/2022, SPi

   xv

8.2a Direct image of a cell from a mouse liver, infected with coronavirus,
20 hours after inoculation. 199
Reproduced with permission from Rockefeller University Press; from
David-Ferreira and Manaker (1965), ‘An electron microscope study of the
development of a mouse hepatitis virus in tissue culture cells’, p. 71.
8.2b Direct image of coronavirus virions accumulating within a human
cell, 12 hours post-infection. 199
Reproduced with permission from American Society for Microbiology; from
Hamre et al. (1967), ‘Growth and intracellular development of a new respiratory
virus’, p. 814.
8.3 Coronaviruses multiplying inside a host cell. (a) SARS (2002–3);
(b) MERS (2012–13); (c) Covid-19 (2019–ongoing). 200
Images all sourced from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
(CDC): (A) https://www.cdc.gov/sars/lab/images/coronavirus5.jpg;
(B) https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/mers/images/MERS-cytoplasm.jpg;
(C) https://phil.cdc.gov/details.aspx?pid=23591. Not under copyright.
8.4 Three different types of coronavirus virion, all of which have
demonstrated the capacity to infect humans. (a) SARS-CoV;
(b) MERS-CoV; (c) SARS-CoV-2. 201
Images sourced from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious
Diseases (NIAID): https://www.flickr.com/photos/niaid/.
8.5 A SARS-CoV virion (RHS) ejecting its genetic material (LHS); for
present purposes the arrows can be ignored. 202
Reproduced with permission from American Society for Microbiology; from
Neumann et al. (2006), ‘Supramolecular architecture of severe acute respiratory
syndrome coronavirus revealed by electron cryomicroscopy’, p. 7925.
8.6 Real images of a virus particle infecting a cell, in three stages:
(i) A&D, (ii) B&E, (iii) C&F; the arrow shows the moment
infection occurs. 202
Reproduced with permission from the American Association for the
Advancement of Science; from Hu et al. (2013), ‘The bacteriophage T7
virion undergoes extensive structural remodeling during infection’.
8.7 Transmission electron microscopy partially reveals the double-helix
structure in a strand of DNA. 203
Reproduced with permission from the American Chemical Society;
from Gentile et al. (2012), ‘Direct imaging of DNA fibers: the visage
of double helix’.
OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 1/7/2022, SPi
 OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 4/7/2022, SPi

1
What Is Future-Proof Science?

1. Science and Scepticism

This book is about identifying scientific claims we can be confident will

last forever. By ‘forever’ I mean so long as the human race continues, and
assuming the scientific endeavour continues in a serious way, without some
sort of apocalypse. For most purposes it is convenient to think ahead just 1000
years. A lot has happened in the development of human thought in the past
1000 years, needless to say. But I want to claim, and I want to argue, that some
of our current ideas will still be with us in 1000 years, so long as the human
race persists and that thing we call ‘science’ is not abolished by some well-
meaning government body. This will strike many readers as hubristic, no
doubt. It may well be asked, ‘Who could dare to claim to know the minds of
humankind 1000 years from now?’ But a persuasive argument can be made,
I believe, that many such scientific ideas can be identified, and so I hope to
persuade many of those readers with a genuinely open mind, including those
who start reading this book with a certain degree of scepticism. I agree that it is
surprising—amazing, even—that we can rationally be confident that certain
scientific ideas will remain intact 1000 years from now. Or even 5000 years
from now. But in fact this is a reasonable thing to believe.
There are (at least) two very different reasons a scientific idea could last
forever:

(i) We are stuck in a rut of human thinking out of which we will never
escape. Our idea is totally wrong (or mostly wrong) but we are some-
how prevented from seeing that, or even if we do see it we are unable to
replace it with something better/truer.
(ii) Science has hit upon the truth, and all that remains is for scientists to
build upon and develop the correct idea they already have. No feasible
scientific developments could bring them to reject the idea.

It is the latter option, (ii), that I mean to refer to with the phrase ‘future-
proof science’. This isn’t to say that (i) is impossible, and we’ll take it quite

Identifying Future-Proof Science. Peter Vickers, Oxford University Press. © Peter Vickers 2023.
DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780192862730.003.0001
OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 4/7/2022, SPi

2   -  ?

seriously in some later chapters. But what I mainly wish to argue is that some
scientific ideas should be called ‘facts’, and they should be called ‘facts’ because
they are true ideas—the universe really is the way the theory says it is (allowing
for small adjustments). Moreover, we have overwhelming evidence for this, to
such an extent that no feasible scientific developments could overturn it. For
example, it couldn’t ever be the case that we have the right idea, and lots of
evidence, but somehow (by sheer bad luck perhaps?) we go on to accumulate
lots of contrary evidence that is sufficient to overturn the correct idea we
started with.
In short, this book argues that we have come to know things through
science, beyond all reasonable doubt. Certain knowledge claims—the product
of scientific labour—are justified, where by ‘knowledge claims’ I mean asser-
tions of fact without any significant hedging or caveats. I hope even sceptics
will grant that this is possible. Sometimes we can have knowledge where we
didn’t have it before. To give an example, we can come to know why the sky
does not run out of rain. Further, it can be the case that we don’t just have a
theory about the rain, but that, over time, we have so much evidence for the
‘water cycle theory’ that it is not unreasonable to say that we are certain, and it
is a fact. We stop talking about ‘the water cycle theory’, and simply talk about
‘the water cycle’. If we meet a sceptic, it would not be unreasonable (though it
may come across as patronising or arrogant) to say, ‘I’m certain; I know that
I’m right about this.’ Of course, in social interactions it is often much preferred
to ‘agree to disagree’, to respect somebody’s opinions and beliefs. It is often
much preferred to dial down one’s confidence and say something like ‘I think
there’s good evidence for this’, as opposed to ‘I know this is true’. But what
may seem like objectionable hubris to your audience can sometimes be fully
justified: it may be no exaggeration to say that you are sure (beyond reasonable
doubt) that you are correct, and an alternative view is wrong, however
uncomfortable it may feel to say this.¹
I think it’s worth expanding on this point about social discomfort a little
further. In many cases we face difficult dilemmas vis-à-vis how we express our
degree of confidence. For example, suppose you visit a music festival, and
you’re laid on the grass one evening staring up at the stars with a new friend.
You hear them say, ‘I guess we’ll never know what those twinkly dots of light
really are.’ You might feel so awkward about contradicting your new friend,
that you actually reply, ‘Yeah, I guess not’, even though (let’s assume) you

¹ The concept of future-proof science is not inconsistent with ‘epistemic humility’; see e.g. Kidd
(2020) for a useful entry to the literature on humility and science.
 OUP CORRECTED PROOF – FINAL, 4/7/2022, SPi

   3

studied astrophysics at university, and feel 100 per cent sure that scientists do
know what stars are. The problem is, you just can’t think of any way to
contradict the person without coming across as patronising. It also doesn’t
really matter if you ‘let it go’ in this particular context.
In other contexts, this tendency to ‘let it go’ or ‘agree to disagree’ absolutely
must be resisted. Sometimes it is crucially important to distinguish clearly
between items of human knowledge, and issues that are unsettled and open for
discussion, without hiding that distinction behind social niceties. If we swap
the musical festival example for the Covid-19 pandemic, and we swap the
statement for ‘I guess we just can’t know whether the AstraZeneca vaccine is
safe’, it becomes far more important to respond honestly instead of simply
answering ‘Yes, you might be right about that’, or similar. Indeed, if you know
a lot of about vaccine testing, it would be wrong not to challenge the statement;
you might even end up saving the person’s life. And in science generally there
are plenty of high-stakes contexts where absolute honesty is paramount, and
social niceties must be put to one side. To illustrate: scientists could not ‘agree
to disagree’ with chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) companies in the 1980s on the
question whether CFCs were causing ozone depletion. If scientists had agreed
with the CFC companies that they couldn’t really prove the link between CFCs
and ozone, and didn’t really know, and there was room for rational doubt, that
would have been a death sentence—at the hand of skin cancer—for thousands
of individuals who are alive today. A similar story can be told about the HIV-
AIDS link (Godfrey-Smith 2021, pp. 311–12), and there were indeed many
unnecessary deaths in this case—this isn’t all merely hypothetical.
At the same time there is of course a sense in which we are never 100 per
cent certain; a certain degree of doubt is always possible. Suppose I strike the
keys of the laptop and say to myself, ‘Do I really know I am typing right now?
Do I really know that I am attempting to write the opening chapter of a book?’
It’s certainly possible that I am wrong. For example (as Descartes famously
urged in the 17th century) I could be having the most vivid dream I’ve ever
had. Or perhaps I am not asleep, but my senses—sight, sound, touch—are
being manipulated in a way that is totally hidden from me (as in The Matrix).
Or perhaps (back with Descartes again) even my thoughts are being manipu-
lated, by some ‘evil demon’ or similar powerful being.
If we accept that these are (remote) possibilities, even for a case as rudi-
mentary as whether I know that I am striking keys on my laptop, then it may
be urged that I shouldn’t say I am sure. I shouldn’t say I am certain. At least not
100 per cent. And if not for everyday facts such as this, then definitely not
for scientific ideas—such as the causal link between CFCs and ozone
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
 “Why, certainly,” said the Whispering Vines. “Some of course are
older than others. But here on the Moon we consider a plant or a bird
or a moth quite young if he has seen no more than two hundred
years. And there are several trees, and a few members of the Animal
Kingdom too, whose memories go back to over a thousand years.”
“You don’t say!” murmured the Doctor. “I realized of course that
your lives were much longer than ours on the Earth. But I had no
idea you went as far back as that. Goodness me!—Well, please go
on.”
“In the old days, then, before we instituted the Council,” the vines
continued, “there was a terrible lot of waste and slaughter. They tell
of one time when a species of big lizard overran the whole Moon.
They grew so enormous that they ate up almost all the green stuff
there was. No tree or bush or plant got a chance to bring itself to
seeding-time because as soon as it put out a leaf it was gobbled up
by those hungry brutes. Then the rest of us got together to see what
we could do.”

“A species of big lizard overran the Moon”

“Er—pardon,” said the Doctor. “But how do you mean, got

together? You plants could not move, could you?”
 “Oh, no,” said the vines. “We couldn’t move. But we could
communicate with the rest—take part in conferences, as it were, by
means of messengers—birds and insects, you know.”
“How long ago was that?” asked the Doctor.—“I mean for how
long has the animal and vegetable world here been able to
communicate with one another?”
“Precisely,” said the vines, “we can’t tell you. Of course some sort
of communication goes back a perfectly enormous long way, some
hundreds of thousands of years. But it was not always as good as it
is now. It has been improving all the time. Nowadays it would be
impossible for anything of any importance at all to happen in our
corner of the Moon without its being passed along through plants
and trees and insects and birds to every other corner of our globe
within a few moments. For instance we have known almost every
movement you and your party have made since you landed in our
world.”
“Dear me!” muttered the Doctor. “I had no idea. However, please
proceed.”
“Of course,” they went on, “it was not always so. But after the
institution of the Council communication and cooperation became
much better and continued to grow until it reached its present stage.”
 THE EIGHTEENTH CHAPTER
The President

T
he Whispering Vines then went on to tell the Doctor in
greater detail of that institution which they had vaguely spoken
of already, “The Council.” This was apparently a committee or
general government made up of members from both the
Animal and Vegetable Kingdoms. Its main purpose was to regulate
life on the Moon in such a way that there should be no more warfare.
For example, if a certain kind of shrub wanted more room for
expansion, and the territory it wished to take over was already
occupied by, we’ll say, bullrushes, it was not allowed to thrust out its
neighbors without first submitting the case to the Council. Or if a
certain kind of butterfly wished to feed upon the honey of some
flower and was interfered with by a species of bee or beetle, again
the argument had to be put to the vote of this all-powerful committee
before any action could be taken.
This information explained a great deal which had heretofore
puzzled us.
“You see, Stubbins,” said the Doctor, “the great size of almost all
life here, the development of intelligence in plant forms, and much
more besides, could not possibly have come about if this regulation
had not been in force. Our world could learn a lot from the Moon,
Stubbins—the Moon, its own child whom it presumes to despise! We
have no balancing or real protection of life. With us it is, and always
has been, ‘dog eat dog.’ ”
The Doctor shook his head and gazed off into space to where the
globe of our mother Earth glowed dimly. Just so had I often seen the
Moon from Puddleby by daylight.
 “Where the globe of the Earth glowed dimly”

“Yes,” he repeated, his manner becoming of a sudden deeply

serious, “our world that thinks itself so far advanced has not the
wisdom, the foresight, Stubbins, which we have seen here. Fighting,
fighting, fighting, always fighting!—So it goes on down there with
us. . . . The ‘survival of the fittest’! . . . I’ve spent my whole life trying
to help the animal, the so-called lower, forms of life. I don’t mean I
am complaining. Far from it. I’ve had a very good time getting in
touch with the beasts and winning their friendship. If I had my life
over again I’d do just the same thing. But often, so often, I have felt
that in the end it was bound to be a losing game. It is this thing here,
this Council of Life—of life adjustment—that could have saved the
day and brought happiness to all.”
“Yes, Doctor,” said I, “but listen: compared with our world, they
have no animal life here at all, so far as we’ve seen. Only insects
and birds. They’ve no lions or tigers who have to hunt for deer and
wild goats to get a living, have they?”
“True, Stubbins—probably true,” said he. “But don’t forget that
that same warfare of species against species goes on in the Insect
Kingdom as well as among the larger carnivora. In another million
years from now some scientist may show that the war going on
between Man and the House Fly to-day is the most important thing in
current history.—And besides, who shall say what kind of a creature
the tiger was before he took to a diet of meat?”
John Dolittle then turned back to the vines and asked some
further questions. These were mostly about the Council; how it
worked; of what it was composed; how often it met, etc. And the
answers that they gave filled out a picture which we had already half
guessed and half seen of Life on the Moon.
When I come to describe it I find myself wishing that I were a
great poet, or at all events a great writer. For this moon-world was
indeed a land of wondrous rest. Trees that sang; flowers that could
see; butterflies and bees that conversed with one another and with
the plants on which they fed, watched over by a parent council that
guarded the interests of great and small, strong and weak, alike—the
whole community presented a world of peace, goodwill and
happiness which no words of mine could convey a fair idea of.
“One thing I don’t quite understand,” said the Doctor to the vines,
“is how you manage about seeding. Don’t some of the plants throw
down too much seed and bring forth a larger crop than is desirable?”
“That,” said the Whispering Vines, “is taken care of by the birds.
They have orders to eat up all the seed except a certain quantity for
each species of plant.”
“Humph!” said the Doctor. “I hope I have not upset things for the
Council. I did a little experimental planting myself when I first arrived
here. I had brought several kinds of seed with me from the Earth and
I wanted to see how they would do in this climate. So far, however,
the seeds have not come up at all.”
The vines swayed slightly with a rustling sound that might easily
have been a titter of amusement.
“You have forgotten, Doctor,” said they, “that news travels fast in
the Moon. Your gardening experiments were seen and immediately
reported to the Council. And after you had gone back to your camp
every single seed that you had planted was carefully dug up by long-
billed birds and destroyed. The Council is awfully particular about
seeds. It has to be. If we got overrun by any plant, weed or shrub all
of our peaceful balance would be upset and goodness knows what
might happen. Why, the President—”
The particular vines which were doing the talking were three
large ones that hung close by the Doctor’s shoulder. In a very
sudden and curious manner they had broken off in the middle of
what they were saying like a person who had let something slip out
in conversation which had been better left unsaid. Instantly a
tremendous excitement was visible throughout all the creepers that
hung around the gulch. You never saw such swaying, writhing,
twisting and agitation. With squawks of alarm a number of brightly
colored birds fluttered out of the curtain of leaves and flew away over
the rocky shoulders above our heads.

“Every single seed was carefully dug up by long-billed birds”

“What’s the matter?—What has happened, Doctor?” I asked as

still more birds left the concealment of the creepers and disappeared
in the distance.
“I’ve no idea, Stubbins,” said he. “Some one has said a little too
much, I fancy. Tell me,” he asked turning to the vines again: “Who is
the President?”
“The President of the Council,” they replied after a pause.
 “Yes, that I understand,” said the Doctor. “But what, who, is he?”
For a little there was no answer, while the excitement and
agitation broke out with renewed confusion among the long tendrils
that draped the rocky alcove. Evidently some warnings and remarks
were being exchanged which we were not to understand.
At last the original vines which had acted as spokesmen in the
conversation addressed John Dolittle again.
“We are sorry,” they said, “but we have our orders. Certain things
we have been forbidden to tell you.”
“Who forbade you?” asked the Doctor.
But from then on not a single word would they answer. The
Doctor made several attempts to get them talking again but without
success. Finally we were compelled to give it up and return to camp
—which we reached very late.
“I think,” said Polynesia, as the Doctor, Chee-Chee and I set
about preparing the vegetarian supper, “that we sort of upset Society
in the Moon this afternoon. Gracious, I never saw such a land in my
life I—And I’ve seen a few. I suppose that by now every bumblebee
and weed on the whole globe is talking about the Whispering Vines
and the slip they made in mentioning the President. President!
Shiver my timbers! You’d think he were St. Peter himself! What are
they making such a mystery about, I’d like to know?”
“We’ll probably learn pretty soon now,” said the Doctor, cutting
into a huge melon-like fruit. “I have a feeling that they won’t think it
worthwhile to hold aloof from us much longer.—I hope not anyway.”
 “Still more birds left the concealment of the creepers”

“Me too,” said Chee-Chee. “Frankly, this secrecy is beginning to

get under my skin. I’d like to feel assured that we are going to be
given a passage back to Puddleby. For a while, anyway, I’ve had
enough of adventure.”
“Oh, well, don’t worry,” said the Doctor. “I still feel convinced that
we’ll be taken care of. Whoever it was that got us up here did so with
some good intention. When I have done what it is that’s wanted of
me, arrangements will be made for putting us back on the Earth,
never fear.”
“Humph!” grunted Polynesia, who was cracking nuts on a limb
above our heads. “I hope you’re right. I’m none too sure, myself—
No, none too sure.”
 THE NINETEENTH CHAPTER
The Moon Man

T
hat night was, I think, the most disturbed one that we spent in
the whole course of our stay on the Moon. Not one of us slept
soundly or continuously. For one thing, our growth had
proceeded at an alarming and prodigious rate; and what
bedding we had (we slept in that mild climate with the blankets under
us instead of over us) had become absurdly short and insufficient for
our new figures. Knees and elbows spilled over the sides and got
dreadfully sore on the hard earth. But besides that discomfort, we
were again conscious throughout the whole night of mysterious
noises and presences. Every one of us seemed to be uneasy in his
mind. I remember waking up one time and hearing the Doctor, Chee-
Chee and Polynesia all talking in their sleep at the same time.
Hollow-eyed and unrested we finally, at daybreak, crawled out of
our various roosts and turned silently to the business of getting
breakfast. That veteran campaigner Polynesia was the first to pull
herself together. She came back from examining the ground about
the camp with a very serious look on her old face.
“Well,” said she, “if there’s any one in the Moon who hasn’t been
messing round our bunks while we slept I’d like to know who it is.”
“Why?” asked the Doctor. “Anything unusual?”
“Come and see,” said the parrot and led the way out into the
clearing that surrounded our bunks and baggage.
 “With a very serious look on her old face”

Well, we were accustomed to finding tracks around our home, but

this which Polynesia showed us was certainly something quite out of
the ordinary. For a belt of a hundred yards or more about our
headquarters the earth and sand and mud was a mass of foot-prints.
Strange insect tracks, the marks of enormous birds, and—most
evident of all—numberless prints of that gigantic human foot which
we had seen before.
“Tut, tut!” said the Doctor peevishly. “They don’t do us any harm
anyway. What does it matter if they come and look at us in our
sleep? I’m not greatly interested, Polynesia. Let us take breakfast. A
few extra tracks don’t make much difference.”
We sat down and started the meal.
But John Dolittle’s prophecy that the Animal Kingdom would not
delay much longer in getting in touch with us was surprisingly and
suddenly fulfilled. I had a piece of yam smeared with honey half-way
to my mouth when I became conscious of an enormous shadow
soaring over me. I looked up and there was the giant moth who had
brought us from Puddleby! I could hardly believe my eyes. With a
graceful sweep of his gigantic wings he settled down beside me—a
battleship beside a mouse—as though such exact and accurate
landings were no more than a part of the ordinary day’s work.
 We had no time to remark on the moth’s arrival before two or
three more of the same kind suddenly swept up from nowhere,
fanned the dust all over us with their giant wings and settled down
beside their brother.
Next, various birds appeared. Some species among these we
had already seen in the vines. But there were many we had not:
enormous storks, geese, swans and several others. Half of them
seemed little bigger than their own kind on the Earth. But others
were unbelievably large and were colored and shaped somewhat
differently—though you could nearly always tell to what family they
belonged.
Again more than one of us opened his mouth to say something
and then closed it as some new and stranger arrival made its
appearance and joined the gathering. The bees were the next. I
remembered then seeing different kinds on the Earth, though I had
never made a study of them. Here they all came trooping, magnified
into great terrible-looking monsters out of a dream: the big black
bumble bee, the little yellow bumble bee, the common honey bee,
the bright green, fast-flying, slender bee. And with them came all
their cousins and relatives, though there never seemed to be more
than two or three specimens of each kind.

“Others were unbelievably large”

 I could see that poor Chee-Chee was simply scared out of his
wits. And little wonder! Insects of this size gathering silently about
one were surely enough to appall the stoutest heart. Yet to me they
were not entirely terrible. Perhaps I was merely taking my cue from
the Doctor who was clearly more interested than alarmed. But
besides that, the manner of the creatures did not appear unfriendly.
Serious and orderly they seemed to be gathering according to a set
plan; and I felt sure that very soon something was going to happen
which would explain it all.
And sure enough, a few moments later, when the ground about
our camp was literally one solid mass of giant insects and birds, we
heard a tread. Usually a football in the open air makes little or no
sound at all—though it must not be forgotten that we had found that
sound of any kind traveled much more readily on the Moon than on
the Earth. But this was something quite peculiar. Actually it shook the
ground under us in a way that might have meant an earthquake. Yet
somehow one knew it was a tread.
Chee-Chee ran to the Doctor and hid under his coat. Polynesia
never moved, just sat there on her tree-branch, looking rather
peeved and impatient but evidently interested. I followed the
direction of her gaze with my own eyes for I knew that her instinct
was always a good guide. I found that she was watching the woods
that surrounded the clearing where we had established our camp.
Her beady little eyes were fixed immovably on a V-shaped cleft in the
horizon of trees away to my left.
It is curious how in those important moments I always seemed to
keep an eye on old Polynesia. I don’t mean to say that I did not
follow the Doctor and stand ready to take his orders. But whenever
anything unusual or puzzling like this came up, especially a case
where animals were concerned, it was my impulse to keep an eye on
the old parrot to see how she was taking it.
Now I saw her cocking her head on one side—in a quite
characteristic pose—looking upward towards the cleft in the forest
wall. She was muttering something beneath her breath (probably in
Swedish, her favorite swearing language) but I could not make out
more than a low peevish murmur. Presently, watching with her, I
thought I saw the trees sway. Then something large and round
seemed to come in view above them in the cleft.
It was now growing dusk. It had taken, we suddenly realized, a
whole day for the creatures to gather; and in our absorbed interest
we had not missed our meals. One could not be certain of his vision.
I noticed the Doctor suddenly half rise, spilling poor old Chee-Chee
out upon the ground. The big round thing above the tree-tops grew
bigger and higher; it swayed gently as it came forward and with it the
forest swayed also, as grass moves when a cat stalks through it.
Any minute I was expecting the Doctor to say something. The
creature approaching, whatever—whoever—it was, must clearly be
so monstrous that everything we had met with on the Moon so far
would dwindle into insignificance in comparison.
And still old Polynesia sat motionless on her limb muttering and
spluttering like a fire-cracker on a damp night.
Very soon we could hear other sounds from the oncoming
creature besides his earth-shaking footfall. Giant trees snapped and
crackled beneath his tread like twigs under a mortal’s foot. I confess
that an ominous terror clutched at my heart too now. I could
sympathize with poor Chee-Chee’s timidity. Oddly enough though at
this, the most terrifying moment in all our experience on the Moon,
the monkey did not try to conceal himself. He was standing beside
the Doctor fascinatedly watching the great shadow towering above
the trees.
 “It was human!”

Onward, nearer, came the lumbering figure. Soon there was no

mistaking its shape. It had cleared the woods now. The gathered
insects and waiting birds were making way for it. Suddenly we
realized that it was towering over us, quite near, its long arms
hanging at its sides. It was human.
We had seen the Moon Man at last!
“Well, for pity’s sake!” squawked Polynesia, breaking the awed
silence. “You may be a frightfully important person here. But my
goodness! It has taken you an awfully long time to come and call on
us!”
Serious as the occasion was in all conscience, Polynesia’s
remarks, continued in an uninterrupted stream of annoyed criticism,
finally gave me the giggles. And after I once got started I couldn’t
have kept a straight face if I had been promised a fortune.
The dusk had now settled down over the strange assembly.
Starlight glowed weirdly in the eyes of the moths and birds that stood
about us, like a lamp’s flame reflected in the eyes of a cat. As I made
another effort to stifle my silly titters I saw John Dolittle, the size of
his figure looking perfectly absurd in comparison with the Moon
Man’s, rise to meet the giant who had come to visit us.
 “I am glad to meet you—at last,” said he in dignified well-bred
English. A curious grunt of incomprehension was all that met his
civility.
Then seeing that the Moon Man evidently did not follow his
language, John Dolittle set to work to find some tongue that would
be understandable to him. I suppose there never was, and probably
never will be, any one who had the command of languages that the
Doctor had. One by one he ran through most of the earthly human
tongues that are used to-day or have been preserved from the past.
None of them had the slightest effect upon the Moon Man. Turning to
animal languages however, the Doctor met with slightly better
results. A word here and there seemed to be understood.
But it was when John Dolittle fell back on the languages of the
Insect and Vegetable Kingdoms that the Moon Man at last began to
wake up and show interest. With fixed gaze Chee-Chee, Polynesia
and I watched the two figures as they wrestled with the problems of
common speech. Minute after minute went by, hour after hour.
Finally the Doctor made a signal to me behind his back and I knew
that now he was really ready. I picked up my notebook and pencil
from the ground.

“ ‘Look!—the right wrist—look!’ ”

 As I laid back a page in preparation for dictation there came a
strange cry from Chee-Chee.
“Look!—The right wrist!—Look!”
We peered through the twilight. . . . Yes, there was something
around the giant’s wrist, but so tight that it was almost buried in the
flesh. The Doctor touched it gently. But before he could say anything
Chee-Chee’s voice broke out again, his words cutting the stillness in
a curious, hoarse, sharp whisper.
“The blue stone beads!—Don’t you see them? . . . They don’t fit
him any more since he’s grown a giant. But he’s Otho Bludge the
artist. That’s the bracelet he got from Pippiteepa the grandmother of
the Fairies!—It is he, Doctor, Otho Bludge, who was blown off the
Earth in the Days Before There Was a Moon!”
 THE TWENTIETH CHAPTER
The Doctor and the Giant

“A
ll right, Chee-Chee, all right,” said the Doctor hurriedly.
“Wait now. We’ll see what we can find out. Don’t get
excited.”
In spite of the Doctor’s reassuring words I could see that he
himself was by this time quite a little agitated. And for that no one
could blame him. After weeks in this weird world where naught but
extraordinary things came up day after day we had been constantly
wondering when we’d see the strange Human whose traces and
influence were everywhere so evident. Now at last he had appeared.
I gazed up at the gigantic figure rearing away into the skies
above our heads. With one of his feet he could easily have crushed
the lot of us like so many cockroaches. Yet he, with the rest of the
gathering, seemed not unfriendly to us, if a bit puzzled by our size.
As for John Dolittle, he may have been a little upset by Chee-Chee’s
announcement, but he certainly wasn’t scared. He at once set to
work to get into touch with this strange creature who had called on
us. And, as was usual with his experiments of this kind, the other
side seemed more than willing to help.
The giant wore very little clothes. A garment somewhat similar to
our own, made from the flexible bark and leaves we had discovered
in the forest, covered his middle from the arm-pits down to the lower
thighs. His hair was long and shaggy, falling almost to his shoulders.
The Doctor measured up to a line somewhere near his ankle-bone.
Apparently realizing that it was difficult for John Dolittle to talk with
him at that range, the giant made a movement with his hand and at
once the insects nearest to us rose and crawled away. In the space
thus cleared the man-monster sat down to converse with his visitors
from the Earth.
It was curious that after this I too no longer feared the enormous
creature who looked like something from a fairy tale or a nightmare.
Stretching down a tremendous hand, he lifted the Doctor, as though
he had been a doll, and set him upon his bare knee. From this height
—at least thirty feet above my head—John Dolittle clambered still
further up the giant’s frame till he stood upon his shoulder.
Here he apparently had much greater success in making himself
understood than he had had lower down. By standing on tip-toe he
could just reach the Moon Man’s ear. Presently descending to the
knee again, he began calling to me.
“Stubbins—I say, Stubbins! Have you got a notebook handy?”
“Yes, Doctor. In my pocket. Do you want me to take dictation?”
“Please,” he shouted back—for all the world like a foreman
yelling orders from a high building. “Get this down. I have hardly
established communication yet, but I want you to book some
preliminary notes. Are you ready?”
As a matter of fact the Doctor in his enthusiasm had misjudged
how easy he’d find it to converse with the Moon Man. For a good
hour I stood waiting with my pencil poised and no words for dictation
were handed down. Finally the Doctor called to me that he would
have to delay matters a little till he got in close touch with our giant
visitor.
“Humph!” grunted Polynesia. “I don’t see why he bothers. I never
saw such an unattractive enormous brute.—Doesn’t look as though
he had the wits of a caterpillar anyway. And to think that it was this
great lump of unintelligent mutton that has kept the Doctor—John
Dolittle, M.D.—and the rest of us, hanging about till it suited him to
call on us!—After sending for us, mind you! That’s the part that
rattles me!”
 “ ‘Stubbins!—I say, Stubbins!’ ”

“Oh, but goodness!” muttered Chee-Chee peering up at the

towering figure in the dusk. “Think—think how old he is! That man
was living when the Moon separated from the Earth—thousands,
maybe millions, of years ago! Golly, what an age!”
“Yes: he’s old enough to know better,” snapped the parrot
—“better manners anyway. Just because he’s fat and overgrown is
no reason why he should treat his guests with such outrageous
rudeness.”
“Oh, but come now, Polynesia,” I said, “we must not forget that
this is a human being who has been separated from his own kind for
centuries and centuries. And even such civilization as he knew on
the Earth, way back in those Stone Age days, was not, I imagine,
anything to boast of. Pretty crude, I’ll bet it was, the world then. The
wonder is, to my way of thinking, that he has any mind at all—with
no other humans to mingle with through all that countless time. I’m
not surprised that John Dolittle finds it difficult to talk with him.”
“Oh, well now, Tommy Stubbins,” said she, “that may sound all
very scientific and high-falutin’. But just the same there’s no denying
that this overgrown booby was the one who got us up here. And the
least he could have done was to see that we were properly received
and cared for—instead of letting us fish for ourselves with no one to
guide us or to put us on to the ropes. Very poor hospitality, I call it.”
“You seem to forget, Polynesia,” I said mildly, “that in spite of our
small size, we may have seemed—as the Doctor said—quite as
fearful to him and his world as he and his have been to us—even if
he did arrange to get us here. Did you notice that he limped?”
“I did,” said she, tossing her head. “He dragged his left foot after
him with an odd gait. Pshaw! I’ll bet that’s what he got the Doctor up
here for—rheumatism or a splinter in his toe. Still, what I don’t
understand is how he heard of John Dolittle, famous though he is,
with no communication between his world and ours.”

“ ‘Very poor hospitality, I call it’ ”

It was very interesting to me to watch the Doctor trying to talk

with the Moon Man. I could not make the wildest guess at what sort
of language it could be that they would finally hit upon. After all that
time of separation from his fellows, how much could this strange
creature remember of a mother tongue?
As a matter of fact, I did not find out that evening at all. The
Doctor kept at his experiments, in his usual way, entirely forgetful of
time or anything else. After I had watched for a while Chee-Chee’s
head nodding sleepily I finally dozed off myself.